Nikol Pashinyan Responds to Aliyev: Interview

The Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, has answered questions from Armenpress. Below is the interview.

- Mr. Prime Minister, in an interview with a Russian media outlet, the President of Azerbaijan confirmed that 15 out of the 17 articles of the draft peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan have been agreed upon, with one of the unresolved issues regarding the non-deployment of third-country forces along the Armenia-Azerbaijan border and the other concerning the withdrawal of claims presented against each other in international courts. What is the position of the Republic of Armenia on this issue?

- We continue to remain constructively engaged with Azerbaijan in the discussions regarding the peace treaty. Regarding the two unresolved articles of the peace treaty, we have already submitted proposals to Azerbaijan for more than a month, for which we have not yet received responses. We propose that the provision on non-deployment of third-country forces applies to the delineated sections of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and this is logical because the risk of escalation is significantly reduced as a result of delineation in those sections, if not minimized. After complete delineation, therefore, there will be no need for the presence of a third force at any section of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border, and the Republic of Armenia offers this logic. As for the withdrawal of claims presented against each other in international courts, this is logical when a peace treaty is signed; therefore, the idea is acceptable to us. There are two nuances here. One is that there should be a clear prospect for resolving individual humanitarian issues in a bilateral format, and the second is that it must be clear that after withdrawing disputes from international platforms, the parties must no longer raise the same issues and escalate the agenda of bilateral relations, turning them into a permanent source of escalation.

- What do you mean by that?

- I mean that not only should disputes in international courts be abandoned, but the disputes themselves should also be resolved. We are ready to go down that path. At this stage, we are also looking for solutions related to individual humanitarian issues.

- In the same interview, the President of Azerbaijan again raised the issue of amending the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, again claiming that our Constitution contains territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

- I have had several occasions to address this topic, and I find it necessary to emphasize again that if this is a sincere concern expressed by Azerbaijan, there are all grounds to consider this concern alleviated. Why? Because the assertions that the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia contains territorial claims against Azerbaijan are based on the argument that the preamble of our Constitution refers generally to the Declaration of Independence, which in turn mentions Nagorno-Karabakh. The Constitutional Court of Armenia, in its decision of September 26, 2024, noted that the reference to the Declaration of Independence in the preamble of the Constitution pertains solely to the provisions of the declaration that have been literally included in the articles of the Constitution. There is no direct or indirect mention of Nagorno-Karabakh in any article of the Constitution of Armenia. If we were to accept the content of the Constitution as Azerbaijan interprets it, this would raise the question of why Nagorno-Karabakh did not participate in the 1995 constitutional referendum, why there were no polling stations opened there, and why people did not vote on the issue of the Constitution. The same can be said about the subsequent presidential and parliamentary elections in Armenia. Moreover, if the Azerbaijani interpretation of the Constitution of Armenia were correct, it would be impossible for our sisters and brothers from Karabakh to be recognized as refugees by the Republic of Armenia.

- You have said that Armenia also has concerns that the Constitution of Azerbaijan contains territorial claims against Armenia.

- Yes, and that concern is based on the fact that the preamble of the Constitution of Azerbaijan refers to the Constitutional Act adopted by the parliament of Azerbaijan on October 18, 1991. The Constitutional Act, in turn, refers to the Declaration of Independence of the First Republic of Azerbaijan adopted on May 28, 1918, which states that the First Republic of Azerbaijan includes Eastern and Southern Transcaucasia. In November 1919, the Republic of Azerbaijan presented its administrative-territorial map to the Entente, according to which the regions of Syunik and Vayots Dzor of the Republic of Armenia, as well as parts of the territories of Ararat, Armavir, Gegharkunik, Tavush, Lori, and Shirak regions, are included in Azerbaijan, constituting approximately 60 percent of the territory of the Republic of Armenia. Thus, the Constitution of Azerbaijan contains territorial claims against the Republic of Armenia. However, we are not raising the issue of amending the Constitution of Azerbaijan for two reasons: first, such a demand would lead to a deadlock in the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process, and second, there is an article in the agreed part of the Peace Treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan stating that the parties cannot reference their domestic legislation to justify the failure to implement this agreement. Another article in the agreed part of the Peace Treaty states that the parties recognize each other's territorial integrity, have no territorial claims against each other, and undertake not to raise such claims in the future.

- Are you implying that due to concerns related to the Constitution, the peace treaty should not be signed, or that the signing of the treaty will alleviate those concerns?

- Definitely. And if we approach the issue from the perspective of the legislation of the Republic of Armenia, according to our laws, the peace treaty must be ratified by the National Assembly after it is signed. Before that, the Government is obliged to send the treaty to the Constitutional Court to verify its compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia. If the Constitutional Court decides that the text of the peace treaty does not comply with the Constitution (although after the decision of September 26, 2024, such a development is unlikely), it would turn out that Azerbaijan’s arguments on this issue were correct, and Armenia would be forced to choose between the Peace Treaty and certain provisions of its Constitution. But if the Constitutional Court decides that the text of the Peace Treaty complies with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, it will proceed to the ratification process in Parliament. According to Article 5, Clause 3 of the Constitution of Armenia, in case of contradiction between the norms of ratified international treaties and laws, the norms of the international treaty shall prevail. Thus, after the Peace Treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan is ratified in Parliament, it will gain superior legal force over the laws of Armenia and other normative legal acts, and the topic of territorial claims will be definitively closed. The same will happen in Azerbaijan. In other words, it is the signing of the peace treaty that will practically alleviate the concerns of both Armenia and Azerbaijan, including those related to their constitutions.

- What is Armenia’s stance on the idea of dissolving the OSCE Minsk Group?

- Constructive. We understand the position that if there is no conflict, what is the sense of having a format engaged in conflict resolution. But we also want to ensure that Azerbaijan approaches the issue with the same logic, and that its push, say, in the development of the so-called "Western Azerbaijan" narrative does not entail implementing an aggressive policy towards the territory of the Republic of Armenia.

- But Azerbaijan claims that it does not make any territorial claims against Armenia with that narrative, saying it is about the right of refugees to return and calling on the Armenian Government to respond to that right.

- It is clear that with the so-called "Western Azerbaijan" narrative, official Baku wishes to objectify the territorial claims it has against the Republic of Armenia, which, as I demonstrated above, are recorded in the Constitution of Azerbaijan. If that is not the case, and if we are mistaken in our perceptions, then when we refer to Western Azerbaijan, we should mean the regions of Qazakh, Tovuz, Agstafa, Gedabey, Dashkasan, Kelbajar, Lachin, Qubadli, and Zangilan within the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Therefore, the return of people there is Azerbaijan's internal affair, and the Armenian Government has no role or discussion in this matter, apart from the questions that have already been discussed with Azerbaijan. By that, I mean establishing normal relations which will ensure, among other things, the security of borders between Western Azerbaijan and Eastern Armenia.

- Mr. Prime Minister, Azerbaijan accuses Armenia of acquiring non-defensive weapons while claiming that Armenia cannot keep up with its arms race.

- Armenia is not in an arms race with any country; we acquire weapons exclusively for the defense of Armenia’s borders and territorial integrity, meaning for defensive purposes, and our intentions are transparent. We are being told that we must acquire defensive weapons for defensive purposes. But you cannot organize defense with defensive weapons; for instance, if Armenia has an over-saturated air defense and REB means, how can it defend itself against ground attacks? Of course, with artillery, of course, with missiles, of course, with other striking means. Azerbaijan is also acquiring non-defensive weapons, does that mean it is pursuing revanchist policies?

- Azerbaijan is trying to make the acquisition of weapons by the Republic of Armenia an agenda issue.

- According to all international norms, the Republic of Armenia has the right to have armed forces and the obligation to protect its citizens, including from possible external threats. Military reforms are our legitimate right. Is that a threat to Azerbaijan? No, because we clearly acknowledge and recognize Azerbaijan's territorial integrity and sovereignty over what was Soviet Azerbaijan and expect that Azerbaijan, like us, will refrain from recognizing the territorial integrity of the Republic of Armenia, in accordance with our agreements reached, and avoid a policy of threats. Practically every day, threatening statements are made from Azerbaijan against the Republic of Armenia. In this context, our response even faces internal criticism, as we say that we do not raise the issue of returning over 200 square kilometers of our sovereign territory occupied by Azerbaijan militarily, because the institutional solutions achieved on the delineation issue provide opportunities to address that issue peacefully, through negotiations. Even in this context, we have proposed establishing a mutual monitoring mechanism for arms with Azerbaijan. However, Azerbaijan has not yet responded, while the difference in the military budgets of Armenia and Azerbaijan has already reached three times in favor of Azerbaijan. Against this backdrop, it is at least unfair to accuse us of arming ourselves.

- How do you assess the risk of new escalation in the region?

- I can guarantee that Armenia has no intention, aim, or plan to attack Azerbaijan or engage in provocative actions and will not go down that road. If Azerbaijan also has no intention to attack Armenia, then the likelihood of escalation in the region is zero.

- Mr. Prime Minister, will the delineation process continue, and if so, at what segment?

- The regulations of the delineation commissions have been ratified in both Armenia and Azerbaijan, which means that the process of delineation must continue. I believe the delimitation commissions will meet in the near future to discuss where to continue delineation.

- What about the issue of regional communications? Azerbaijan continues to develop its corridor logic.

- In our assessment, we have found a solution regarding how to reopen railroad communications that will be fully acceptable to both Armenia and Azerbaijan. We have conveyed this proposal in written form to Azerbaijan and are awaiting their positive response. Once that response is received, it will be necessary to quickly sign a contract and proceed with the construction of the railway.